Re: [netmod] Review comments for module-tags-02

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

Obviously, this is now a slightly different statement. There are NMDA
transition guidelines that have been discussed at length and finally
been integated into

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-20#section-4.23.3

This section 4.23.3 says under case (a):

   Both the NMDA and the non-NMDA modules SHOULD
   be published in the same document, with NMDA modules in the document
   main body and the non-NMDA modules in a non-normative appendix.

In other words, you do not pollute a new NMDA module with non-NMDA
subtrees but instead you create an additional module that goes into an
appendix and is only relevant for transition purposes. I think Rob
created tools to generate such things. Section 4.23.3.1 also provides
some guidelines for creating temporary non NMDA modules.

/js

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:22:39PM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
> If the server does not yet support NETCONF-NMDA / RESTCONF-NMDA drafts, then we will need this separate subtree to show the system defined tags.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: 17 October 2018 17:22
> To: Rohit R Ranade <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Christian Hopps <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [netmod] Review comments for module-tags-02
> 
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:46:03AM +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote:
> 
> > I think we need to define a subtree for non-NMDA clients to get the 
> > operational tags.
> 
> It is not much of a change for a _client_ to read a different datastore hence I do not think this is needed.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>